Pennsylvania Gun RightsNRA's Election Volunteer Coordinators in Southeast Pennsylvania2015-01-09T03:43:58Zhttp://www.pagunrights.com/feed/atom/WordPressEVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=25072015-01-09T03:43:30Z2015-01-09T03:42:57ZThe best Attorney General that anti-gun political donor Mike Bloomberg’s money could buy is facing possible criminal charges at the recommendation of a grand jury. According to sources, the grand jury recommended perjury and contempt of court for the Attorney General’s role in leaking confidential grand jury materials to the press in order to embarrass opponents.
]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=25002014-06-10T19:50:07Z2014-06-10T19:16:37ZWhich Pennsylvania lawmakers sought or ran on NRA’s endorsement and have not signed on to support the current national reciprocity bill, H.R. 2959?

While looking at the list of co-sponsors with an eye on those from Pennsylvania, I found some key names left off of the sponsors list.

These are the members of the Pennsylvania congressional delegation who support the bill:

Rep. Mike Kelly (R)

Rep. Tom Marino (R)

Rep. Tim Murphy (R)

Rep. Scott Perry (R)

Rep. Keith Rothfus (R)

Rep. Bill Shuster (R)

Rep. Glenn Thompson (R)

I might add that Rep. Rothfus actually didn’t have the NRA endorsement last time around. He had an A rating based on his questionnaire, but with the incumbent Democrat’s A record, it was issued to the incumbent. However, he is standing behind this bill regardless of that endorsement.

These are the members of the Pennsylvania congressional delegation who sought or received NRA’s endorsement in 2012 against anti-gun opponents who are not on that co-sponsor list:

In 2014, some gun owners may find it hard to get excited by candidates who don’t even think that law-abiding citizens who undergo regular background checks still can’t be trusted with firearms. If you live in any of these districts, it might be good to let them know that you noticed they wanted your vote in 2012, but that they haven’t made and effort to get on board with national reciprocity.

]]>EVC Buckshttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24932014-05-12T17:34:55Z2014-05-12T17:34:55ZIt appears that Attorney General Kathleen Kane has quietly ended Pennsylvania’s reciprocity agreement with the State of Utah. The notice of a change is absent on the Attorney General’s site, and if you look at handgun law.us, it notes at the bottom that as of yesterday, “Pennsylvania NO Longer Honors Utah.”

That AG Kane would do this quietly is unconscionable because it makes it far more likely someone is going to end up in prison because they were unaware of the reciprocity change. This isn’t the first reciprocity agreement she has revoked. On July 29th of last year, the same day that Pennsylvania gained statutory reciprocity with Kansas, she rescinded our reciprocity agreement with Idaho. In early 2013, she modified the agreement with Florida, but did not give notice to the changes that impacted gun owners until a week after the new agreement went into effect.

The Attorney General’s office, under state law, has an duty to sign reciprocity agreements in 6109(k):

(k) Reciprocity.–
(1) The Attorney General shall have the power and duty to enter into reciprocity agreements with other states providing for the mutual recognition of a license to carry a firearm issued by the Commonwealth and a license or permit to carry a firearm issued by the other state. To carry out this duty, the Attorney General is authorized to negotiate reciprocity agreements and grant recognition of a license or permit to carry a firearm issued by another state.

(2) The Attorney General shall report to the General Assembly within 180 days of the effective date of this paragraph and annually thereafter concerning the agreements which have been consummated under this subsection.

I’d argue that concurrent with that duty is not to exit reciprocity agreements that have been negotiated under this subsection. I’d note that Pennsylvanians can still carry in Utah and Idaho, because those states honor any other state permit. But residents of Utah and Idaho may no longer lawfully carry in Pennsylvania. For residents of those states, I’m very sorry, but elections have consequences, and when we elect a Bloomberg-ally for an Attorney General, these are the consequences.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24852014-03-18T17:38:09Z2014-03-13T00:14:47ZThe petitions have been filed, and now we have a clearer picture of the big races on the ballot this year in Pennsylvania. Some gun control backers have indicated that they just need to make it past the elections before they try pushing their bills at the federal level again, so the issue is not going away any time soon.

At the federal level, all 18 Congressional seats are up in 2014, but no Senate spots will be on the ballot. The races that should stand out for gun owners include most of Southeast Pennsylvania, and a handful in other parts of the state.

Perhaps one of the most watched seats in the country will be PA-6, a district that includes Chester, Montgomery, Berks, and Lebanon Counties. The seat is currently held by Rep. Jim Gerlach, an A rated incumbent who is retiring at the end of this term. Republican Ryan Costello, currently the Chairman of the Chester County Board of Commissioners, isn’t facing any GOP challenge on the primary ballot. Dueling for the Democratic nomination are first time candidate Mike Parrish and Manan Trivedi, a three-time candidate who has repeatedly refused to answer policy questions from NRA members.UPDATE: Word has now come that Democrat Mike Parrish has dropped out after filing his petitions.

In PA-7 (portions of Berks, Chester, Delaware, Lancaster, and Montgomery Counties), Democrats are lining up behind university professor Mary Ellen Balchunis to take on pro-Second Amendment Rep. Pat Meehan. In an interview with the local paper, and previous tweets supporting White House gun control efforts, Balchunis indicates that she will make passing federal gun control a top priority should she win.

While the district probably won’t be terribly competitive for an anti-gun Democrat who worked with NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg to bring more gun control to Pennsylvania as member of MAIG, former Harrisburg Mayor Linda Thompson is a late entry into the PA-4 race against A+ rated Rep. Scott Perry. Under Mayor Thompson’s leadership, Harrisburg earned the distinction of being the first ever city charged with securities fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission over issuing misleading financial information released by the city’s administration. This election race will impact gun owners in Adams, Cumberland, Dauphin, and York Counties.

For gun owners in PA-8 (Bucks and Montgomery Counties), previously A rated Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick is facing two Democratic opponents. Neither Kevin Strouse nor Shaughnessy Naughton has a background in politics with any kind of voting record on Second Amendment issues. Both have indicated support for President Obama’s previous gun control agenda in interviews, and Ms. Naughton says she plans to push a mandate for “gun liability insurance,” typically a bill that requires gun owners carry insurance policies that don’t even exist in order to continue exercising their fundamental rights. (NRA-ILA most recently addressed the many problems in this type of legislation in Washington, DC.)

On the opposite side of the state, PA-12, a previous battleground district in Allegheny, Beaver, Cambria, Lawrence, Somerset and Westmoreland Counties, A rated Rep. Keith Rothfus is facing two Democratic challengers, John Hugya and Erin McClelland, a candidate who has publicly backed portions of the President’s gun control agendas in local media.

Just to the north in Armstrong, Butler, Clarion, Crawford, Erie, Lawrence, and Mercer Counties represented in PA-3, A rated Rep. Mike Kelly appears to have drawn two Democratic opponents, Dan LaVallee and Mel Marin who appear to have no voting records on the issue.

Across the state in PA-10, Democratic challenger Scott Brion is on the ballot against A rated Rep. Tom Marino in the district that includes Bradford, Juniata, Lackawanna, Lycoming, Mifflin, Monroe, Northumberland, Perry, Pike, Snyder, Sullivan, Susquehanna, Tioga, Union, and Wayne Counties. While A rated Rep. Lou Barletta is being challenged by Democrat Andy Ostrowski in neighboring district PA-11 that includes Carbon, Columbia, Cumberland, Dauphin, Luzerne, Montour, Northumberland, Perry, and Wyoming Counties.

In less worrisome districts unlikely to see a serious challenge by gun control advocates, A rated incumbents Rep. Tim Murphy and Rep. Charlie Dent have no opponents at this time, A rated Rep. Joe Pitts currently has two Democratic opponents (including B rated former State Rep. Tom Houghton), A rated Rep. Bill Shuster has drawn two GOP challengers with one Democrat on the ticket, and A rated Rep. G.T. Thompson currently has two Democratic opponents.

Unfortunately, a handful of districts in Pennsylvania have a reputation and the political base to send gun control advocates to Congress without a serious challenge. Those include Philadelphia’s incumbents Rep. Bob Brady and Rep. Chaka Fattah, though each has drawn a GOP challenger. In a similarly safe anti-rights district out west, Pittsburgh’s Rep. Mike Doyle has a primary opponent. In PA-13 (Montgomery and Philadelphia Counties), the Democratic candidates are largely a who’s who of gun control advocates vying for the seat with F rated State Sen. Daylin Leach facing off against D+ rated State Rep. Brendan Boyle, former Rep. Marjorie Margolies who has a history of supporting semi-auto bans, and Val Arkoosh who has no voting record on the issue. There are two GOP candidates in this district, but neither is likely to pose a serious challenge to the Democratic primary winner. In PA-17, which used to support a former Second Amendment-supporting Democrat, there is no primary challenge to Democrat Rep. Matt Cartwright, though three GOP candidates are on the ballot.

In our next post, we’ll look at statewide races gun owners need to focus on for 2014.

]]>EVC Buckshttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24782013-07-30T18:30:30Z2013-07-30T18:30:30ZEugene Volokh highlights how the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has opened the door to redefine Pennsylvania’s self-defense standard from one which requires the state to disprove a claim of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt, to one where the defendant has to prove self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence. This would essentially shift the burden from the state to the defendant. Prof. Volokh notes that the legislature can codify the standard and settle the issue, which we might need to start pushing. A burden shift like this is going to mean more ambiguous self-defense cases are going to end up going to trial, even if the state doesn’t have a remarkably strong case.

Looks like we’re not finished on this subject yet in Pennsylvania. Looking at the opinion here, it would seem to me that there might be the votes to change the standard, since three justices joined in the Chief’s opinion, while only two filed concurring opinions that took issue with the self-defense statements. Note that Orie Melvin did not participate in this case because she was on leave from the court, and eventually convicted of several felonies.

Pennsylvania conducts Supreme Court elections in off years. A lot of people, including gun owners, don’t vote in these elections. These are the wages of that belief. Or perhaps I should say the continuing wages of that belief, because we’re still living with de facto registration in Pennsylvania thanks to the ruling in ACSL v. Rendell. I’d note that opinion was handed down in 2004, and we’re still hearing nothing but promises from legislators in terms of fixing that, nearly a decade later. I would not hold out hope they’ll fix the self-defense issue if the Supreme Court acts there in any kind of timely manner. Supreme Court elections are very important.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24582015-01-09T03:43:58Z2013-05-10T16:45:08ZThis is a great example of why states need preemption laws. Morrisville, PA has an ordinance that bans possession of firearms in their public parks unless a distinct permit has been issued.

The activities listed below shall not be permitted in any park or playground unless a permit has been secured for such activity from the Borough Council, or its agent, the Borough Manager. No permit shall be issued unless an application therefor shall have been made at least 24 hours before the time of the activity. In the case of seasonal activities, a permit may be issued for the entire season.

(a) Groups or parties in excess of 12 persons.
(b) Placements of placards, advertisements or public notices.
(c) Fires, other than in a fireplace or other equipment provided for cooking purposes, or for a bonfire or campfire as part of an authorized event.
(d) Firearms or the discharge of firearms or other weapons.
(e) Soliciting of alms or subscriptions.
(f) Selling or exposing for sale any articles.

The language that “firearms” “shall not be permitted” “unless a permit has been secured for such activity from the Borough Council, or its agent, the Borough Manager” that must be submitted “at least 24 hours before the time of the activity” seems to make it pretty clear that they issue their own permits to possess firearms in parks at least 24 hours in advance of your planned time to be in the park. I wanted to know more about this little gem of an ordinance.

In trying to find out more about that permit, I called the borough, found myself transferred to three different staff members in Borough Hall in my first call, put on hold for nearly 10 minutes, and still couldn’t tell you anything about the process to apply for this permit outlined in their code. I was then told to contact the Police Department for the permit information, including cost, but the Police Department said that any and all permitting in regards to parks happens through Borough Hall and sent me back to the third woman with whom I spoke. She eventually transfered me to a borough leader who said that the borough doesn’t actually issue permits, but they require that state licenses to carry in order to possess firearms in any way in public parks. I very specifically asked if that applied to open carry as well, and he said that all carry in parks required the state license to carry. (This is illegal for them to demand.)

What’s interesting is that this borough has already been warned off of violating Pennsylvania’s preemption law in a letter sent by firearms attorney Joshua Prince just four days ago. It would appear that instead of requiring you to notify them at least 24 hours in advance of any trips to the park and securing a permit at an unknown price with, what I was told, an application that apparently never existed, they are continuing to violate state law by demanding licenses to carry concealed for any possession at all – concealed or not.

This why we need preemption with some teeth. A good start is Sen. Rich Alloway‘s SB 876. It does at least make local governments pay for the cost of challenging their abuses of power. It would certainly improve the situation in Morrisville since, in all likelihood, the problem ordinance never would have been passed in the first place. Even if it was on the books, the borough itself would be on the financial hook for a court challenge to their illegal ordinance and almost certainly wouldn’t find it acceptable for their leaders to give out illegal advice without consequence.

Can you imagine what a mess gun owners would be in if ordinances like this one were allowed to stand? The permits could cost hundreds of dollars or require gun owners to fund security for the “event” of having a concealed firearm in the park, permits could have complex application forms that required absurd advance notice, or we could find out that, like Morrisville, applications never existed because they never intended to honor their own ordinance that requires a borough-issued permit to possess.

Unfortunately, Sen. Chuck McIlhinney, Morrisville’s State Senator, has not signed on as a co-sponsor of this preemption bill, even with this blatant violation of state law in his own district.

In case you missed it back in January, Reed Exhibitions sponsored the Eastern Sport & Outdoor Show (ESOS) in Harrisburg every year and managed to generate upwards of $74 million in a local economic impact and in support of the non-profits that raise money and sign up memberships at the ESOS. However, Reed suddenly banned the display of modern sporting rifles this year and the backlash of their attack on our community cost them so many vendors and customer refund requests that they had to “postpone” the show. The show has never been rescheduled by the company and the entire situation was handled so poorly by Reed that some lawmakers publicly indicated that they hoped Reed would never be allowed to host the show again.

All of that meant that Harrisburg-area tourism groups and Farm Show Complex organizers went shopping for a new host to a sporting show for the region. Conveniently, NRA already hosts a smaller scale show just 70 miles down the road in Maryland right around the same time of year.

It was announced today that NRA has been selected as the vendor to run a much larger scale Great American Outdoor Show in Harrisburg during the traditional time of the ESOS going forward. NRA members who attended the NRA Annual Meeting & Exhibits in Pittsburgh in 2004 or 2011 know that the organization has great experience running massive shows in Pennsylvania. We look forward to the addition of this annual show drawing in gun owners from around the region.

Maryland, after pushing extreme anti-gun legislation, now loses the economic impact of that show and Pennsylvania gets a new vendor for the sportsmen’s show that doesn’t turn on the hunters & shooters who support the show. To top it off, Reed forever loses the multi-million dollar show they once hosted. Anti-gunners from Reed & the Maryland legislature lose big opportunities and Pennsylvania wins with a better exhibition host and added dollars into the economy.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24452014-06-10T19:17:02Z2013-04-10T00:56:16ZIf you follow us on Twitter or Facebook, you know we’ve been sounding the alarm since Friday that reports were coming out Senate Democrats were turning to Pennsylvania’s Republican Senator Pat Toomey for help on passing new gun control bills. It appears as though they may have convinced him.

Toomey spox: “Senators Toomey and Manchin continue to work on final details but they appear close to a deal.” — Jonathan Tamari (@JonathanTamari) April 9, 2013

NBC News also reports that Sen. Toomey’s spokesperson is scheduling a press conference alongside West Virginia’s Sen. Joe Manchin to promote this deal.

There’s nothing available on what deal he put together, but Pennsylvania voters need to make every single phone in every single office ring loud and clear tomorrow morning. Every office that allows voicemails should have a completely full box by the time staff arrive. Call tonight; call again tomorrow.

Need a reminder for the phone numbers?

DC – (202) 224-4254

Allentown – (610) 434-1444

Erie – (814) 453-3010

Harrisburg – (717) 782-3951

Philadelphia – (215) 241-1090

Pittsburgh – (412) 803-3501

Scranton – (570) 941-3540

Johnstown – (814) 266-5970

If you find they are full by the time you call, send an email and call again in the morning when staff arrive.

It’s tough to say whether a flood of calls will truly change Sen. Toomey’s mind at this point, but the debate isn’t over and there have been no votes cast, so the message that gun owners are not happy needs to be sent loud and clear.

Sen. Toomey’s response is disconcerting since it means that some House Republicans from Pennsylvania in tight districts will likely look to support to gun control bills floated in the House of Representatives. With that in mind, it’s wise to start contacting your Congressman now, too. If you live in the ring counties of Philadelphia, this is particularly important.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24392014-05-12T17:35:26Z2013-04-04T16:14:56ZSome Pennsylvania activists are trying to drum up opposition to a local effort to promote more gun control at the federal level. Lancaster’s City Council is expected to vote on Tuesday to support Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Guns & all of their gun control efforts.

A fellow Election Volunteer Coordinator shared the email addresses for any Lancaster residents who can’t make it to the meeting to oppose this resolution:

The linked article notes that the resolution is expected to pass. Regardless, it might be worth reminding these council members that municipal elections are this year. An outcry might just make some hesitate to use limited city resources to promote gun control at the behest of the New York City mayor.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24282014-03-13T00:15:17Z2013-03-28T11:00:34ZToday, billionaire Michael Bloomberg is partnering with President Obama to call forth any grassroots they can find to promote gun control. As Pennsylvania residents, you may see rallies, petition drives, commercials on cable and broadcast, and candlelight vigils at night. They are rolling out in every single corner of the state. Some local groups of gun owners are planning to counter with peaceful and quiet protests using signs with phrases like, “They have the First amendment because of the 2nd.”

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24222013-07-30T18:34:21Z2013-03-24T21:14:39ZNew York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg is spending $12 million dollars to target voters in key states, including Pennsylvania. The television ads run by the Mayor do not identify that they are funded by Bloomberg, and they feature a self-proclaimed gun owner actor who says that nothing about Sen. Chuck Schumer’s background check bill will put any current gun owners at risk. Informed gun owners who have read the language know that it’s an absolute trap designed to make the concept of a “transfer” so complicated that one needs legal advice to figure out if leaving town on a business trip will turn the entire family into felons facing five years in prison.

The anti-gun group founded & funded by Mayor Bloomberg is also making a splash local politics with an event in Bucks County this month. Mayors Against Illegal Guns is sponsoring a rally for gun control in Doylestown, 27 miles north of Philadelphia, alongside Rep. Steve Santarsiero‘s new anti-gun advocacy group, Bucks Safe, that will coincide with the television ad purchase.

The perception that Bloomberg’s political donations and multi-million dollar ad buys will provide political cover from upset voters may already be impacting the votes of Sen. Bob Casey. On Saturday morning, he voted against legislation that would prevent the United Nations from overriding individual Second Amendment rights protections through their Arms Trade Treaty. The amendment had bi-partisan support from Senators around the country, including Sen. Pat Toomey.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24192013-03-21T23:21:40Z2013-03-21T23:18:23ZThe run on firearms and ammunition since President Obama took office has frustrated many with bare shelves and long waits before orders are fulfilled. However, the surge in gun-related spending has resulted in a windfall of returns for hunters & shooters through the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Program.

Today, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service announced that Pennsylvania would receive a record $19,158,429 in matching grants to fund projects to restore, conserve, manage and enhance wild birds and mammals and their habitat. Projects also include providing public use and access to wildlife resources, hunter education and development and management of public shooting ranges. The non-federal share of project funds (at least 25% of a project cost) often comes from state revenues derived from license fees paid by hunters.

The total funds dispersed nationwide come to $522.5 million for the year, and that shatters the previous record of $473 million in 2010, according to media reports. That year, Pennsylvania received $17,020,573.

The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act includes an apportionment formula that distributes program funds to States based on the area of the state (50%) and the number of paid hunting license holders (50%). No state may receive more than 5 percent, or less than one-half of one percent of the total apportionment.

Wildlife Restoration program funds come from manufacturer excise taxes collected by the U.S. Treasury and deposited in the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Trust Fund. The Service’s Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program (WSFR) administers the Trust Fund. Once collected, the funds are distributed to state fish and wildlife agencies for eligible wildlife restoration activities. The manufacturer excise taxes include:

10% tax on pistols, handguns, and revolvers;

11% on firearms and ammunition; and

11% tax on bows, quivers, broadheads, and points.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=24142013-05-10T18:08:54Z2013-03-20T20:24:54ZWith the anti-gun bill package signed in Colorado, gun owners around then country must start laying the groundwork for 2014. Here in Pennsylvania, select regions may also start testing the water by targeting MAIG mayors in municipal elections this year.

For average gun owners who only have limited energy for following the political fight should still be focused on writing letters or making phone calls at the federal level. However, if you have the energy and dedication to step your activism up a notch, we’ve reached out to other activists to come up with ideas that members of gun clubs can use to make a difference for pro-gun candidates. (All of those looking to involve themselves in elections with organized gun clubs should look into any state or federal laws that may be relevant in terms of fundraising and in-kind donations before following ideas suggested here or developed offline.)

>> Contact the candidates you are backing and ask if they could set aside some “manual labor” type jobs for your club to offer during designated work times. The things that would most easily fit with typical gun range work times would be putting together yard signs, hammering together the frames for really large signs to be posted at intersections and larger plots of land, and even stuffing literature bags for precinct walks. These are activities that more gun guys who may not feel the most confident in walking door-to-door and being social or making phone calls to strangers can do. Even better, because of the need for target stands at many ranges, the tools and skills for building sign frames are already available.

>> Offer the club facility for use as a fundraising site for a local candidate. The campaign can handle everything, but they at least have use of the facility for free. The only real concern for the club in this case is to set up ground rules for use of the club (i.e. who is responsible for cleanup, any restrictions on catering, noise regulations, etc.).

>> Offer to actually host a fundraiser for a candidate or slate of candidates. Rather than simply allowing a campaign to use to property, the club would act as host of the fundraiser – arranging a caterer or finding club members who can cook up some hamburgers, inviting members and families, etc. While many people think of fundraisers as something big and expensive, they don’t have to be. Do a simple/cheap food theme and charge something like $25 or $30 per adult. If you do this early in the campaign season, you’re more likely to get the candidate out to the event where people can meet him/her and actually talk issues. And, there’s no reason to stop at just offering food. You could make it a shoot or match for added fun and social opportunities.

>> If the club is really willing to get involved, then work with a campaign to do secure pre-paid cell phones and set up a day to do some phone banking from the club. Bring in some pizza, sandwiches and sodas for club members, and give them work time credit. Make it a social event at the club. If the campaign is larger – like a Congressional or Senate campaign – then they may even have a list of call sheets that just target fellow sportsmen. It’s much, much easier to make a phone call to a stranger in support of a candidate when you know the talking points are about issues you know and the recipient is a fellow gun owner. If the local campaigns don’t have this level of targeting, NRA will have such systems in place to make calls to gun owners in favor of their endorsed candidates. Also, big secret to phone banking, you almost always just talk to answering machines, so it doesn’t require being that social.

>> See if the guys and gals who shoot matches with guns that are the targets of gun bans would be willing to get together one day for a couple of hours of door knocking and dropping off literature. Working in small groups is an easy way to knock out a neighborhood quickly, and it’s a bit of exercise and time in the sun.

>> If the club doesn’t have the facilities to host an event, use the club newsletter or calendar to promote outside candidate events like the low-level fundraisers, precinct walk days, and especially any kind of sportsmen’s outreach events. Unfortunately, you may not always have the months or weeks of heads up about these types of events required for traditional newsletter publication, but you can use a club website and/or an email list. Start thinking about these kinds of activities as typical additions to the club’s matches and other events. Just like competitions help preserve the Second Amendment by keeping people engaged with the gun culture, political work for pro-gun candidates also helps preserve the Second Amendment.

>> Invite your pro-gun lawmakers to club events where there will be quite a few people – picnics, major meetings, special events, etc. If you don’t have many club events to choose from, consider inviting them to join you at a table at a Friends of NRA dinner. Make sure to communicate with them what kind of event it is – whether or not it is one where they are allowed get up and say a few words or give a full speech. If you do arrange an event like this, give the scheduler or other staffer some idea of what the audience will be like. Sure, it may be taking place at a gun club, but that doesn’t mean the only issue people there care about relate to guns. If there are common traits or circumstances that apply to the membership beyond a shared love of our rights, let the lawmaker know so they can be prepared to answer questions about those issues, too.

>> Start at the real grassroots of your local political structures. A fellow NRA volunteer suggested identifying precinct or other hyper-local party captains or leaders in your area and inviting the pro-Second Amendment leaders to a social shoot at the facility. They could get to know club leaders, meet club members, and be reminded of the potential power of the pro-gun vote. Another consideration might be to issue an invitation to all of these hyper-local leaders to an educational class or demonstration at the range.

]]>EVC Buckshttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=23172013-04-10T00:56:49Z2013-03-13T01:03:15ZAnti-gun lawmakers kept the so-called “background check” bill that they planned to move in the US Senate under wraps, only putting forth a shell bill with no specifics. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) applied the text through an amendment at the last minute, before it passed. We now have the details of that bill, including the text. Only having time to skim the details, but here are the key problems:

If a gun owner leaves town for more than 7 days, and leaves a domestic partner or unrelated roommate at home with the guns, they would be committing a felony transfer. For states that recognize marriages that the federal government does not, there’s no exemption for those spouses. In any of these situations, it means 5 years in prison for the people involved.

Actually, even married couples are questionably legal because the exemption between family only applies to gifts, not to temporary transfers. The 7-day implication is if a gun owner leaves their spouse at home for more than 7 days, it’s an unlawful transfer and they become a felon facing 5 years in prison. I suppose one could gift them to a spouse, or related co-habitant, and then have them gift the entire gun collection back upon arrival back home. Maybe the Attorney General will be generous enough to create a form for that type of temporary gift.

It would be illegal to lend a gun to a friend to take shooting. That would be a transfer causing the offender to face 5 years in federal prison.

The bill steals the livelihood of gun dealers by setting a fixed fee to conduct transfers. The fee is fixed by the Attorney General. What’s to prevent him or her from setting it at $1,000 in order to punish firearms owners?

The legislation enacts de facto universal gun registration through record keeping requirements.

All lost and stolen guns must be reported to the federal and local government. This means everyone will have to fill out the theft/loss form, and not just FFLs. Gun owners will only have 24 hours to comply. If one lose a gun on a hunting trip deep in the woods, and that person cannot get back home to fill out the form in less than 24 hours, they become a felon and will face 5 years in federal prison.

If one hunter wants to lend a gun to a friend to go hunting, it’s a felony.

The bill makes no exception for state permits to carry or other permits that require regular background checks. All transfers must go through a dealer or offenders will face 5 years in federal prison.

Even gun owners who are teaching someone to shoot on their own land will be committing a felony with 5 years in prison if the new shooter is handed the gun. Such a transfer on private property is not exempted as lawful.

Gun owners need to punish any lawmaker who voted for this extreme bill. It’s nothing more than an attempt to put more gun owners in prison. Sen. Schumer was wise to keep this under wraps because his bill is truly draconian. I not only expect the GOP to vote against this bill, I personally expect them to filibuster it. Let’s see if the Democrats can get to 60 without any Republican support, and the party may see how many of them want to lose their seats in 2014. (Neither of Pennsylvania’s Senators are up for re-election in 2014, but many are in states that take pride in their strong pro-gun traditions.)

This bill has nothing to do with ensuring people who are getting guns are law-abiding, and everything to do with getting backdoor registration and creating a patchwork of rules and laws that will land anyone who uses guns without first possessing a law degree in federal prison for a long time. Lots of otherwise law-abiding people are going to federal prison if this ends up passing, and many are convinced that’s the whole idea.

Pennsylvania gun owners need to contact Senators Bob Casey and Pat Toomey as soon as possible and ask them to oppose this so-called background check bill.

If you have heard a rumor that NRA plans to back this horrible legislation, please do not believe it. This rumor is being promoted by the former network known as MSNBC – a home to many hosts who do not believe in the individual right to bear arms. NRA-ILA has even put out a statement to address this issue.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=23032013-04-04T16:15:26Z2013-02-27T20:58:11ZIt seems like we just put the presidential election behind us, and, yet, there are already more elections to think about in terms of gun rights. Most political observers are already looking to 2014 with an anticipated competitive gubernatorial race and the possibility of at least one open Congressional seat. However, gun owners have a chance to make a difference for the Second Amendment in this year’s municipal elections against mayors who have been quietly lobbying Washington, DC officials in support of a ban on semi-automatic rifles.

Below, you’ll find just a few of the mayors in select counties facing election this year who have joined with New York City’s Michael Bloomberg to lobby against your right to bear arms.

Many of these mayoral races are unchallenged, but others are closer than you can imagine. For example, Penndel’s 2009 mayoral race was decided by just 68 votes. For a tiny borough like Penndel, that seems like a pretty big margin. However, it doesn’t take into account significantly decreased turnouts. Fewer than 26% of registered voters in Bucks County actually cast a ballot in local races that year.

Across the border into Montgomery County, the mayoral race for Pottstown was decided by just 2 percentage points. Somewhat farther north, the mayor of Roseto in Northampton County was elected by only 53 votes. Out in the west, Ingram’s anti-gun advocate mayor in Allegheny County won his last election by just 9 votes!

Right now, candidates for municipal elections are still circulating petitions to get on the primary ballots on May 21. You may be able to find out from local opposing parties if there are known candidates for the office yet.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=22982013-02-27T02:15:45Z2013-02-27T02:03:46ZNot content to simply add new concealed carry restrictions to some people in Pennsylvania, Attorney General Kathleen Kane has decided to promote bans on commonly owned firearms and accessories used by Pennsylvania residents on national television. She took to Chris Matthews’ show to say that Pennsylvanians would gladly accept new gun restrictions.

Make sure that your lawmakers know that you don’t agree with the Attorney General, and that you want them to oppose new gun control measures!

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=22942013-03-28T14:37:23Z2013-02-26T22:56:02ZAll of the federal gun control bills and state proposals aren’t stopping local towns from weighing in on the Second Amendment battles.

On the anti-rights side, we have seen quite a bit of action. First there was the effort by Lower Makefieldto lobby for ending preemption, but they deserve credit for rescinding their resolution.

In the next county over, Upper Moreland is currently pushing to use public resources to lobby for more gun control, seemingly for semi-automatic rifle bans and more – possibly including full registration according to supporters. (Unfortunately, the township hasn’t posted minutes, resolution text, or videos from recent meetings, so actual language isn’t easily available.) One of the Upper Moreland proposal’s supporters compared gun owners & NRA members to Nazis during public debate during the January meeting. Township residents who want to oppose this should contact their commissioners this week and follow up at their March 4 7pm regular meeting at Township Building, 117 Park Avenue in Willow Grove.

On the pro-rights side, New Britain, PA is considering a resolution to reaffirm the Second Amendment is an individual right and that the town “strongly objects to the passage of any new law or regulation … that infringes upon Second Amendment rights.”

Explaining why she wanted the resolution, [Councilwoman Mary Pat] Holewinski said, “When I was elected and sworn in, I swore to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the Pennsylvania Constitution. I introduced it as a means for borough council to show support for the Constitution.”

Residents who want to weigh in on the pro-Second Amendment resolution can attend the March 12 meeting at 7:30 p.m. at Borough Hall.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=22902013-03-28T14:37:12Z2013-02-22T18:51:15ZPresident Obama’s newly re-organized policy group, OFA, is spending 6 figures on a single Twitter campaign today to target Republicans they think they can cause problems for with Second Amendment issues. Gun owners need to step up and oppose this massive purchase of “grassroots” activity.

So, with a little click of your mouse, you can tweet to each of the Pennsylvania lawmakers with one of these messages. If you live in their district, make sure to say it. If you don’t tweet, the lawmaker names go to their Facebook pages.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=22862013-03-28T14:37:35Z2013-02-21T15:45:00ZYesterday afternoon, we passed on an alert from a local gun club to gun owners in the area of Lower Makefield Township in Bucks County via Facebook. It turns out that a January meeting of the Board of Supervisors featured an anti-gun advocate who pressed the Board to engage in a bit of anti-Second Amendment lobbying on “behalf” of the citizens of the town.

While the anti-gun advocate initially demanded that the town leaders lobby federal lawmakers to support a ban on semi-automatic rifles, the Board was apparently cautious about entering the federal debate. However, they instead decided to pass a resolution calling on higher level lawmakers to end Pennsylvania’s preemption statute.

Pennsylvania’s preemption law says that only the state can pass laws that regulate the use and ownership of firearms. Allowing local governments to create their own regulations would mean that licensed concealed carry holders or recreational shooters who travel the state to compete would have to memorize different regulations in every single one of Pennsylvania’s 56 cities, 958 boroughs, and 1,547 townships. In other words, we effectively could never leave our own towns with our firearms if we did not want to risk breaking a gun law.

Gun owners rallied. They emailed their supervisors and told them that this resolution was simply not acceptable. Many gun owners turned out to the meeting to let the township leaders know how unhappy they were with the resolution.

Oddly enough, it was actually through a verbal challenge by a gun control supporter that one supervisor, after acknowledging that the resolution was one of only two votes he has ever come to regret, made a motion to actually rescind the previous month’s resolution and lobbying request. After some additional discussion, the motion to rescind the anti-preemption lobbying resolution passed unanimously.

We covered the meeting live on the @PAGunRights Twitter account. This was a great example of how gun owners shut down their own local resources being used against them to lobby against important Second Amendment protections with just a few emails and by showing up one evening. Granted, those gun owners in Lower Makefield Township now know that they will have to keep an eye on these local lawmakers to make sure they don’t oppose our rights again, but at least they were able to succeed at home in this fight.

]]>EVC Bucks-Montcohttp://www.pagunrights.comhttp://www.pagunrights.com/?p=22822013-03-13T01:59:42Z2013-02-11T20:04:23ZVice President Joe Biden decided to lecture Philadelphia-area tv viewers and newspaper readers about how banning commonly owned firearms isn’t a violation of the Second Amendment.

Biden in Philly: No conflict between gun proposals and Second Amendment

It’s accurate to say he’s lecturing at media consumers rather than speaking to the public because Joe Biden would not release details of the event location or time to the public, nor were citizens allowed to attend the so-called roundtable on gun control.

One tactic the Vice President is using is to redefine the understanding of the Second Amendment.

See, there’s his “legitimate right to bear arms” which doesn’t include common semi-automatic rifles or popular handguns with 15 or 17 round magazines. This creates a notion that there’s the “illegitimate right to bear arms” that isn’t worth mentioning because, well, those people who oppose the White House are simply illegitimate.

But Biden isn’t the only one speaking out. Likely gubernatorial candidate Rep. Allyson Schwartz is in attendance and joining the push for a gun ban. Rep. Bob Brady, head of the Philadelphia Democratic Party, highlighted how proud he is of his F rating from NRA.